I do not agree with the…

I do not agree with the proposal of disposing Conservation Authority lands.

Covid-19 has heightened the importance of our natural areas as a way to get outside, have a break, and enjoy nature. They are essential for the social, physical and well-being of thousands of residents.

They contain environmentally sensitive lands such as wetlands, forests, wildlife habitat, and ANSIs. Where there are vacant 'environmental area' they should be restored. The PPS and Growth Plan recognize the role of nature as important public spaces and mitigating the impacts of climate change.

Many conservation authorities were donated from people who wanted to see lands protected, and not built for housing.

There are many, many other solutions for housing.

Require the redevelopment of greyfields and brownfields prior to any consideration of natural areas or public lands. Underutilized parcels of land need to be revitalized. Perhaps more flexible policies on employment and commercial lands conversion would create more housing. I see many municipalities with land that is sitting for lease. Old strip malls, even new industrial office buildings that have been built, but have sat vacant due to over supply.

Perhaps all commercial development should be required to be a minimum of three-stories. Housing commercial on the bottom and residential above.

New houses, particularly in greenfield areas should be required to be built to accommodate, two units. They should be built with a separate access. Many homes are built as a single unit, and it is very expensive and the design may not provide for two units. British Columbia has done an excellent job, whereby townhouses, semi-detached and detached are built to house two units.